 |
Odd how Mr. Data Science Math doesn't provide a link to his Data Science Math "Aktually it's the opposite!" study. And 2020 the year chosen as representative? Re: "We have nothing to fear
Author: I'd like to read the fine print
Date: 04-06-2024 - 16:39
The numbers you claim might be correct. But sound way too good to be true on the EV side.
Who did the study? Who funded the study? Who funded those who funded the study? What is their track record? Do they have a history of political bias? You know, the type of questions you'd be asking if the results differed with your preferred narrative on a subject.
Those numbers smell odd. I'd like to read the fine print on how things were defined, what would be included and excluded, etc. It has the scent of the East Anglia method of 'research' and results.
I do appreciate you, and they, comparing apples to apples. With a "per 100,000" unit of measurement.
Off the top of my head I can't give a 100% reason why 2020's events would necessarily invalidate the results. But it clearly wasn't a representative year. How do the results compare to 2019 or 2018 or 2017? Or 2021 If that is out? Odd to only use 2020.
Since I use data, math, and science to determine or estimate likely outcomes...
Here's the data on car fire risk by vehicle type...
Electric vehicles: 25 fires per 100,000 sold
Gas-powered cars: 1,530 fires per 100,000 sold
Hybrid cars: 3,475 fires per 100,000 sold
The study also reviewed the number of fire-related vehicle recalls that were “filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2020.” Gas-powered cars had by far the most number of recalls. EVs were second for recalls, and hybrids were a distant third. However, something to keep in mind is that the researchers only collected recall data in 2020, which was before the Chevy Bolt recalls during last year.
This exagerated "danger" about is similar to the nonsense we were fed in the 90's and 2000's about the "risks" of CNG fires in cars and trucks. Actual data showed that CNG vehicles were less prone to fires than gasoline vehicles.
Now, you are hearing the same crap about how "evil" "dangerous" hydrogen, which is a "highly flamable" gas (You know about what happened to the Hindenburg, right?...)... Since this is a rail chat board, we've heard a lot about this sort of nonsense, about hydrogen fuel cell rail vehicles like the "evil" hydrogen fuel cell Stadler's...
As my favorite American philosopher, the late George Carlin, used to like to say: "It's bullshit, and it's bad for you....)
Better safety design of all vehicles has cause the annual number of car fires to fall by nearly 2/3rds since 1980 for all cars.
As another great American once said: "The only thing you have to fear, is fear itself...."
Who did the study? Who funded the study? Who funded those who funded the study? What is their track record? Do they have a history of political bias? You know, the type of questions you'd be asking if the results differed with your preferred narrative on a subject.
Those numbers smell odd. I'd like to read the fine print on how things were defined, what would be included and excluded, etc. It has the scent of the East Anglia method of 'research' and results.
I do appreciate you, and they, comparing apples to apples. With a "per 100,000" unit of measurement.
Off the top of my head I can't give a 100% reason why 2020's events would necessarily invalidate the results. But it clearly wasn't a representative year. How do the results compare to 2019 or 2018 or 2017? Or 2021 If that is out? Odd to only use 2020.
Since I use data, math, and science to determine or estimate likely outcomes...
Here's the data on car fire risk by vehicle type...
Electric vehicles: 25 fires per 100,000 sold
Gas-powered cars: 1,530 fires per 100,000 sold
Hybrid cars: 3,475 fires per 100,000 sold
The study also reviewed the number of fire-related vehicle recalls that were “filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2020.” Gas-powered cars had by far the most number of recalls. EVs were second for recalls, and hybrids were a distant third. However, something to keep in mind is that the researchers only collected recall data in 2020, which was before the Chevy Bolt recalls during last year.
This exagerated "danger" about is similar to the nonsense we were fed in the 90's and 2000's about the "risks" of CNG fires in cars and trucks. Actual data showed that CNG vehicles were less prone to fires than gasoline vehicles.
Now, you are hearing the same crap about how "evil" "dangerous" hydrogen, which is a "highly flamable" gas (You know about what happened to the Hindenburg, right?...)... Since this is a rail chat board, we've heard a lot about this sort of nonsense, about hydrogen fuel cell rail vehicles like the "evil" hydrogen fuel cell Stadler's...
As my favorite American philosopher, the late George Carlin, used to like to say: "It's bullshit, and it's bad for you....)
Better safety design of all vehicles has cause the annual number of car fires to fall by nearly 2/3rds since 1980 for all cars.
As another great American once said: "The only thing you have to fear, is fear itself...."
